Michigan testing 16 minute halves

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Rich

Last I checked, my contracts were for 1 game....not for 32 minutes.

You must have missed the sarcastic tone and the winky face at the end of my post.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by SC Official

You must have missed the sarcastic tone and the winky face at the end of my post.

It's gotta be written in BLUE.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SC Official

You must have missed the sarcastic tone and the winky face at the end of my post.

There are a lot who are serious about this, though. And I could see fees going up eventually. But I can't be bothered to care much. If I cared about amount of money, I'd probably be doing something else.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Rich

There are a lot who are serious about this, though.

Maybe like the coaches association of that state who originated the experimental effort.
And maybe the state who expects the schools involved to submit post-game reports on the experience.
Not, apparently, the officials who were never asked about it preliminarily and whose opinion after the fact isn't being sought.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. One fewer report to have to do.
Either way is ok with me. Don't perceive any difference in approach to officiating.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Don't perceive any difference in approach to officiating.

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, public high school games are four, eight minute quarters, while private prep high schools have always played two, sixteen minute halves. Because my assignment commissioner knows that I like to work Saturdays, when most prep schools schedule games, I do more than my share of prep school games, so I feel competent to comment on the difference between officiating a game with quarters, and with halves.

I like the automatic break after an eight minute quarter. It gives me time to reflect on the first eight minutes, how the game is going, what I need to do differently, or better, and maybe to have a short meeting with my partner to discuss a few things.

Many prep school coaches like to save their timeouts for the second half, near the end of the game, so the first half of a prep school game is always an up, and down, affair; lead becomes trail, trail becomes lead; whistles for fouls, and violations; with no timeouts. The officials have to mentally, and physically, be "on" all the time. All of a sudden you look up at the scoreboard, to check the bonus situation, and note that there are only three minutes left in the first half, with no "time out" for a "mental break".

I prefer four quarters. Two halves wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but I would still prefer four quarters.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I like the automatic break after an eight minute quarter. It gives me time to reflect on the first eight minutes, how the game is going, what I need to do differently, or better, and maybe to have a short meeting with my partner to discuss a few things.

Many prep school coaches like to save their timeouts for the second half, near the end of the game, so the first half of a prep school game is always an up, and down, affair; lead becomes trail, trail becomes lead; whistles for fouls, and violations; with no timeouts. The officials have to mentally, and physically, be "on" all the time. All of a sudden you look up at the scoreboard, to check the bonus situation, and note that there are only three minutes left in the first half, with no "time out" for a "mental break".

I prefer four quarters. Two halves wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but I would still prefer four quarters.

From the NCAAW aspect of things I'm enjoying the switch to quarters for many of the reasons Billy has laid out. It's nice to have a minute - actually 75 seconds - to reflect on what happened and address issues with my partners. Also, even though I'm young at heart my legs have been known to feel their age from time to time. A built-in rest doesn't hurt.

Having the teams fouls reset has its merits, too. The 5th foul in the 1st and 3rd quarters can arrive quickly but at least I know after ten minutes we go back to zero again.

[walt]

JetMet I agree. NCAAW I like the quarters and the 75 sec break in between. I also like the option to advance although it does have some challenges in recognizing whether there was a dribble or pass while recognizing a coach at the opposite end of the floor calling time out. I found it leads to more communication for the crew which is not a bad thing.

In Delaware, DIAA has gone back and forth about playing halves v quarters but has decided to stay with whatever the NFHS decides. We are still fighting the 3 person v 2 person fight. The closest we've gotten is the assignor has discretion to assign 3 person where he/she deems necessary for the game. So, we have been gradually pushing up the number of three person games. Some schools are complaining but progress has been made.

[SCalScoreKeeper]

Walt-
Which part of DE do you serve? I spent 6.5 years in Wilmington in the mid 90's and Early 00's

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by walt

In Delaware, DIAA has gone back and forth about playing halves v quarters but has decided to stay with whatever the NFHS decides. We are still fighting the 3 person v 2 person fight. The closest we've gotten is the assignor has discretion to assign 3 person where he/she deems necessary for the game. So, we have been gradually pushing up the number of three person games. Some schools are complaining but progress has been made.

If the assignor deems it necessary to send 3 instead of 2, how does that affect game fees? And what happens if the assignor sends in 2 for the GV contest, but 3 for the BV contest that immediately follows?

[Matt S.]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

From the NCAAW aspect of things I'm enjoying the switch to quarters for many of the reasons Billy has laid out. It's nice to have a minute - actually 75 seconds - to reflect on what happened and address issues with my partners. Also, even though I'm young at heart my legs have been known to feel their age from time to time. A built-in rest doesn't hurt.

Having the teams fouls reset has its merits, too. The 5th foul in the 1st and 3rd quarters can arrive quickly but at least I know after ten minutes we go back to zero again.

One other 'bonus' is that we will never hear a coach or fan say, 'look at the fouls, it's 7-2!'

See what I did there

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

There are a lot who are serious about this, though. And I could see fees going up eventually. But I can't be bothered to care much. If I cared about amount of money, I'd probably be doing something else.

I don't care much about this. But, at some point, the issue would matter. That point would vary from person to person depending on how much longer a game would be. At some point, it wouldn't be fair to ask officials to work for the same amount. In going to halves, there are two intermissions removed. Even if they add more timeouts, not all teams would take them, so, I'd guess the average game wouldn't really change much.

My biggest opposition (mild) is simply "Why"? There isn't a problem that needs fixing. I have not heard any arguments justifying the change aside from just changing. Don't fix what isn't broken.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Rich

There are a lot who are serious about this, though. And I could see fees going up eventually. But I can't be bothered to care much. If I cared about amount of money, I'd probably be doing something else.

Game fees would only need to go up if the halves were longer than 16 minutes.